The Deadly Atheist Meme Even Christians Get Wrong

Many atheists and even many Christians think that “faith” is blindly trusting in someone/something despite the evidence. Neither group gets this from the Bible. Atheists say it because it makes Christians sound anti-intellectual, and some Christians say it because they are anti-intellectual. Both are wrong.

The Deadly Atheist Meme Even Christians Get Wrong

Published by Haden Clark

Haden lives in North Texas with his wife, daughter, and three dogs.

46 thoughts on “The Deadly Atheist Meme Even Christians Get Wrong

  1. A ridiculous article that fails at every step.
    Dawkins’ quote is accurate. Faith is belief without evidence and thus, such belief has to be indoctrinated in one form or another.
    The primary foundational tenet of Christianity is the claimed resurrection of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth for which there is no evidence whatsoever, merely a claim in a text known to be full of error across almost every discipline rendering it nothing more than historical fiction.

    The more that Christians continue to try to justify their faith by equating it with sound reason and evidence the more they look foolish, and worse, disingenuous.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Oh Ark, my friend. The supposed “miracles” are anything but the tenets of Christianity. The tenets: feed the hungry, clothe the naked, covet not thy neighbor’s wife, love your neighbor as yourself, turn the other cheek, care for the sick, visit those imprisoned, bear no false witness, etc. Not everyone, as you plainly assume, is such a fundamentalist, though, you’d have to actually associate with these folks to recognize that obvious truth. Are these above tenets so bad? Can you provide a better philosophy?


      1. The primary tenet of the xian faith is the Resurrection. So says the charlatan Saul of Tarsus and who am I, a lowly non believer to doubt the word of Marcion oops … sorry, I mean Paul.

        Can you provide a better philosophy?

        Why yes, of course ….
        Secular humanism.


      2. Finally! We can agree on something, Paul wasn’t simply a charlatan, he was an outright heretic, and certainly, doesn’t represent the tenets of Jesus’ doctrine. Well anyhoo, to each their own. Be well, my friend.


      3. Well, as it should be beyond obvious at this point, I’m no fundamentalist. Now, “resurrection” or “anastasis”, for the most part, simply means: illuminated, irradiated, or raising up, this is, arguably, in the spiritual and intellectual sense. Even so, for me to state that Jesus did not rise from the dead, in the absolute literal and physical sense, well, I cannot say in absolute certainty, I mean really, I wasn’t alive 2000 years ago, and nor were you. Now, to say that no one can rise from being “clinically dead”, well, that would be absolutely absurd, as even in our modern day these things happen. One must “rise” out of a superficial and fundamental way of viewing these texts, I bet we can both agree on that one.


      4. I concur with your example of clinically dead.
        However, we are discussing what is generally considered to be the primary foundational tenet of the Christian faith:
        the physical supernatural bodily resurrection of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth, for which Saul of Tarsus asserted that, failure to beleive in would mean that Christianity is meaningless.

        Am I correct in stating that you are in agreement that this is nothing but a piece of narrative fiction?


      5. I would not, exactly, follow that train of thought. Again, I believe that Paul was a heretic, one who drew people away from the core tenets of Jesus’ teaching. I, personally, do not believe that for one to be “saved” they have to believe in the physical resurrection; however, this is the deciding factor, according to Paul, and further, that everyone needs to NOW follow, ONLY, his teachings and interpretations. Paul is, in a sense, anti-Jesus’ doctrine. I do not ascribe to the interpretation or revelation of Paul, though, unfortunately, many do in the most literal sense. This has been, for some time, a clarification that I tirelessly work to unravel with many folks. Though, as I’m sure you’re well aware of, it’s an ever uphill battle. You may enjoy brushing up on the Gnostic way of interpreting these subjects, though, I’m certainly no true gnostic, mainly, because I refuse to fall into dualism as some foundation point for existence, but I digress.


      6. So, do you beleive in the physical resurrection of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth?
        I concur that, Christians generally follow the teachings of ”Paul” . whoever he really was.
        I am on the fence whether he, too was a genuine historical figure.


      7. I don’t believe the physical resurrection of Jesus is relevant to me in understanding, or further, implementing the tenets of Jesus’ doctrine. I’ve never been one to absolutely, without uncertainty, say in either case. Our minds and hearts need resurrection from the darkness and madness in the world, this is where I’m at, spiritually speaking. Finally, my friend, we are conversing in a meaningful way, and I must say, I’m truly enjoying it.


      8. Like I stated before, I was not present, waiting in front of the tomb 2000 years ago. Therefore, who am I to say in absolute certainty? I cannot say it is an absolute historical fact, no more, than can say that it is absolutely not a historical fact. I will NEVER fall into a dualistic mindset, my friend, never.


      9. You weren’t there when dinosaurs roamed the earth either, Do you have doubts about them also?
        How about Noah and the flood?

        Do you consider there is evidence for the resurrection?
        Or … put another way, do you consider Habermas’s argument stating the resurrection to be historical fact carries the day?
        A simple yes or no will suffice, as I tire of tap dancing

        Liked by 1 person

      10. I remember asking you for 1-4 century refutations, and you provide some hack from our modern era. Not surprising. Further, the simple mind craves the simple answer. So much for that meaningful conversation.


      11. What refutations? Please refresh my memory.
        What hack?

        You wish to have a meaningful conversation then immediately go off on a wishy washy tangent, refusing to offer straightforward answers.


      12. It’s now glaringly obvious that you are not even present in your own commentary, let alone what anybody else brings to the conversation. Therefore, I’ve lost all patients trying to explain what is ever apparent to even those who are only half-studied.


      13. Lost all your patients ? What are you, a doctor?
        Hack? Are you referring to the apologist arse-hat Habermas?

        Just answer the question.
        Do you believe in the actual physical resurrection of the bible character, Jesus of Nazareth?


      14. You were the one who initially instigated dialogue, and with a couple of exceptions have obfuscated almost from the get go. I think your obsessive avoidance of straightforward questions quite odd.


      15. I initiated the dialogue? Who has the first comment under this post? Again, are you even present during any of this, or are you just pounding out key strokes in a frustrated haze? My position is clear, now, whether you understand it, or not, well… And once again, simple minds crave simple answers.


      16. Yes, you initiated dialogue WITH ME.

        Your position is not clear at all . You are vague, wishy washy and sitting on the fence.
        I have not asked you what you know but what you believe.
        Do you
        I have asked you for evidence which you have steadfastly refused to make even the slightest effort to understand but keep shunting forward unsubstantiated claims .
        At one point we seemed to have brought dialogue back on the rails and immediately I ask if you believe in the physical resurrection of the character Jesus of Nazareth you begin the same tired old song and dance routine.
        Note: I did not ask what you know but simply what you believe . Do you understand that these are two different concepts?

        And once again, simple minds crave simple answers.

        A simple mind is one that is prepared to accept any old shlock. And a straightforward answer does not mean it has to be a simple one.
        And if your answer is causing confusion then that is the fault of the answer, not the one that you are explaining it to.
        But you seem determined to behave like a Dickhead, so who am I to stand in the way of willful ignorance and wanton stupidity.
        As they say in the army:
        ”Carry on, Sergeant!”


      17. It is an open forum.
        People express opinions, views, beliefs etc all the time. It is the nature of communication. It is the raison d’etre of blogging for goodness’ sake.

        You are obviously coy about stating your belief(s) regarding the pertinent question and I am curious why this is?
        I have no qualms whatsoever stating I an an atheist and fully anti-theism.

        Are you afraid of being ostracized by other Christians?
        I am sure you are aware that, if you do not believe in the physical resurrection of the character Jesus of Nazareth you are not considered to be a Christian (by Trinitarians at least), much as Crossan is not regarded as one these days I understand.


      18. Oh, the designation Dickhead is such a wonderful creative go to when dealing with certain types.
        If you would prefer something along the lines of ‘honest’ and ‘portraying intellectual integrity’ then feel free to demonstrate such behaviour and I will gladly bestow these titles.


      19. An atheist (your self-label) with a user name of, Arkenaten, who is, arguably, a major forefather to a sort of quasi-monotheistic worship. An atheist who obsesses over apologetics. One who demands “evidence”, but can himself provide nothing of the sort. One who confuses name calling with creativity. You are drowning in a sea of confusion and contradiction, my friend. Again, maybe you should stick with cupcakes, one liners memes, and bird watching, it suits you.


      20. Yes, I love the irony, don’t you?
        It always raises an eyebrow or two.
        Took you long enough to pick up on it.

        You have asked me for evidence of my beliefs or even what I believe.

        And as you are the one making the positive claims the onus falls with you to provide evidence.
        Don’t get on my case for asking straightforward questions that you refuse to answer. and then wonder why you get labelled Dickhead.


  2. Much of science is also just belief. Ever seen a Volt? Neither did I, yet its evidence proves its existence.

    There is bigotry and zeal in science, atheism and Christianity. Each to their own. I can’t argue with anyone radically believing in nothing.


    1. Much of science is also just belief. Ever seen a Volt? Neither did I, yet its evidence proves its existence.

      Science is based on observation and experimentation.
      You can’t see the wind either but you know it’s there.
      Similar thing with gravity.
      Maybe you would like to offer evidence for your beliefs? Or do rely on faith?


      1. My life so far has had ample evidence of supernatural intervention while, in the face of that, science failed me dismally. The choice is obvious


  3. “Nothing is solid.” Yet believers would not have known that today if SCIENCE hadn’t come around and explained it. God didn’t explain it and the bible certainly didn’t have a clue about what matter is made of. Holding on to preconceived beliefs or ideas that have been embedded in your mind from infancy is like that. What you believed to be true such as a man resurrecting from the dead, walking on water, turning water into wine, being born of a virgin etc. etc. does not stand up to scientific evidence and cannot be proven to be true, but you hold on nevertheless to these fallacies because…….?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. As a christian I believe the bible. Reading this post and some of the comments makes me think of Hebrews 11:1 “Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: